DescriptionFor decades, there has been substantial debate regarding whether it is preferable for a metropolitan area to be governed by a single local government, or by some number of smaller municipalities. Advocates of the latter, informed by Tiebout (1956) and public choice theory, argue that competitive markets in public goods can and should exist, while those in the former camp believe economies of scale and ability to plan cohesively at the regional level make unitary systems preferable. The literature on this topic, reviewed extensively here, has focused disproportionately on matters of public finance while venturing into other fields of public policy inquiry far less often. Does jurisdictional fragmentation have broader implications? This work will use regression analysis to test whether the structure of local governance affects a variety of outcomes, including ethnic and racial segregation, land use patterns, economic performance and inequality, educational achievement, and housing costs. Overall, results are mixed, though they suggest a future course of research: investigating whether fragmentation has worsened spatial mismatch in the labor market among African-Americans.